For years, there has been a lot of backlash against the “objectification of showers”, which i can totally understand because it’s a “condescending” term that looks at showers like objects, not as actual places of epiphany.
But the same is happening with the concept of “showerthoughts”: If ideas are referred to as “showerthoughts”, that means that they are being reduced to their hygenic circumstances; to their ability to shower.
That is a condescending term. The view should be that showers are good places for thoughts first, and places to wash your junk second. Thoughts deserve showers, and a good wash, not because they’re showerthoughts, but because they come from showers. That is how showers should be looked at.
Ok, you’ve convinced me! Today’s a wake’n’bake day!
Well, enjoy, but if my post starts to seem like an acceptable submission to you, you might want to get mids next time.
Did you run a lame joke through an AI and post the output?
If not, get outside because you might have a carbon monoxide leak.
No, i’m this dumb all the time. I promise.
If you flipped showers and shower thoughts in the first paragraph I think it would have worked. Not sure if the second could be saved.
For years, there has been a lot of backlash against the “objectification of shower thoughts”, which i can totally understand because it’s a “condescending” term that looks at shower thoughts like objects, not as actual places of epiphany.
They are referencing another post from earlier today that claims the word “worker” is dehumanizing.
Thanks, that actually makes it even worse than gibberish. Not because it couldn’t have been funny, just that it is so incoherent.
That’s a shower thought of all time.
You should post this on shitposts. Or maybe not, I think those need to be funny…
You’re not my dad.
Shit up “worker”!
